jamesst
Established Member
The belief of shoving more services onto already tightly timed lines as opposed to increasing coaches on existing services has always puzzled me
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
TransPennine Express North Route, New Timetable
- Thread starter tothetrains
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Kite159
Veteran Member
Especially since the toy-train 185s have low density seating with an overlarge 1st class area.
TPE are a bit like Chiltern, in thinking that intermediate stations just get in the way of their prime market [TPE being Manchester - Huddersfield - Leeds - York with Chiltern being London - Bicester - Oxford/Birmingham]
What about Liverpool and Newcastle?
nr758123
Member
Talk about First World Problems!
That could be said about most discussions on Railforums.
I'm inclined to think the same when the good folk of Harpenden are complaining about their 8 trains an hour in the peak get reduced to only 6, or something of that magnitude.
When your peak service has been reduced from half-hourly to hourly, and then that hourly service is often cancelled or terminated short at Stalybridge, and it's impacting on people's jobs and family life, then just possibly it should go on the list of things that need fixing, and be worthy of discussion on that basis.
Talk about First World Problems
Normally with a timetable change there are winners and losers. However, if this upcoming change gives a much more stable/reliable and achievable timetable then we shall all be winners for once.
It depends what it's being compared with. Compared with the timetable before May 20th, at the local stations between Huddersfield and Stalybridge there will be few winners. Just possibly it might bring back levels of reliability comparable with two years ago.
yorkguy
Member
- Joined
- 15 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 66
OnTimeTrains putting Malton at 2,602 out of 2,613 in terms of punctuality and cancellations, based on last 12 week’s performance. Seamer comes in at 2,573. Local paper (Malton Gazette) running a piece on this with the headline “Malton station one of the worst in the country”
Data used by that site offers grim reading for the users of Northern and TransPennine Express. 'Worst' stations:
https://www.ontimetrains.co.uk/stations#1
Slaithwaite
#2
#3
Chilworth
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
Dewsbury
#9
#10
#11
#12
#13
#14
#15
#16
#17
Lockerbie
#18
#19
#20
Whitchurch (Shropshire)
#21
#22
Penrith
#23
#24
#25
#26
Durham
#27
#28
#29
Feniton
#30
Thetford
Acklington can effectively be ignored as there is next to no service.
Blimey who works in Mirfield hardly a major market, and frankly should just get rid of Morley which inconveniently sited no where near the centre, and cottingly just catch the bus from there, of course that won’t happen
Last edited:
Boysteve
Member
The Malton people are lucky compared to the Scarborough people on that line. Today was average with close to 50% of TPEx services arriving at Scarborough with 10 minutes of time. Tuesday was terrible when 10 (TPEx) trains in a row were either cancelled or delayed!!!
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Closing Morley and Cottingley would make the stupid White Rose Centre station slightly less stupid... You don't happen to work for Leeds City Council do you?
It really would not be possible to have a higher density of seating without sacrificing things like the number of doors or the number of toilets or wheelchair spaces, which are probably unacceptable.
Furthermore it would not be possible to have any smaller of a First Class area that's actually worth selling any First Class tickets in, and again First Class is a franchise requirement.
I'm not sure what you think should be done but frankly there is no sensible change to be had. The train has three coaches and that's it. It's not much. If you wanted more capacity it needed more coaches.
Kite159
Veteran Member
Getting rid of 1st class on the too small 185s will improve things, not popular for those students on cheap as chips advance 1st tickets or for those season ticket holders who have 1st class seasons as a way of improving chances of getting a seat. 1st class can be kept on the new stock when it eventually enters service & on the 350s.
It will be for the benefit of the many rather than for the few
Last edited:
Closing Morley and Cottingley would make the stupid White Rose Centre station slightly less stupid... You don't happen to work for Leeds City Council do you?
Very good, but seriously it does strike me cottingley should go, and no White Rose probably isn't a good idea. The current timetable is ridiculous and should never have happened hopefully the new will be at least more robust.
61653 HTAFC
Veteran Member
Cottingley has had loads of new houses built right next to the station in the last decade. If either should go it'd have to be Morley Low, which as you said is poorly located, and getting rid might allow an increase in speed.
In an ideal world, Morley town would be the terminus of a modern tramway in Leeds, rendering the heavy rail station redundant... but that's another issue altogether!
Iskra
Established Member
This. TPE couldn't operate 4tph across the core reliably, 6 was never going to work.
It would add a tiny number of standard class seats, while losing all of the First Anytime ticket revenue. Plus, it is a franchise commitment.
nr758123
Member
I've been told that White Rose would be a replacement for Cottingley, though I can't remember the source so it may not be correct. But it seems plausible. If I lived near Cottingley station I'd be a bit unhappy about this.
Possibly when the scope of the Transpennine Route Upgrade is announced it will all become clear.
Kite159
Veteran Member
But then it will add more seats for regular passengers to use, rather than those students using cheap as chips 1st advances or the odd person paying for first anytime.
But it probably won't make any difference as First love to see standard class rammed solid when there is only a single student on a cheap advance or another member of staff travelling for free in the overlarge 1st class area, with the guard ready to pounce in case someone dares enter the large space.
Simple way of providing 1st on a 185, turn the seats behind the drivers cab at the non-ballroom end into 1st class, put a dividing door to make it like the 170s were. TPE is merely a regional express service, and other similar services cope without needing a massive 1st class area.
It will affect the few but will benefit the many.
Agree here, seems to be an endemic problem of today's railway, cram it full to bursting off-peak with sub-full-length trains rather than _longer_ trains at lower - but still good - frequency. Result is a jammed railway very prone to delays at the slightest thing; railway travel was much more pleasurable when you didn't have to wait at signals every hour or so due to an overly intensive service of trains perhaps half their maximum length. Without using the line regularly, I would reckon that as little as 3 trains an hour at an even 20-min interval and of suitable length would be sufficient off peak from Manchester to Leeds, increasing to 4 per hour in the peaks. Same goes with running a 20 minute service _all day_ on Virgin from MAN and Birmingham to Euston, with the knock on effect that local services out of Manchester and New St lose their nice evenly spaced half-hourly timetable that a half-hourly Virgin service would allow. Again, why not half-hourly with a third train an hour restricted to the peaks (as defined by ticket restriction period, so say after 1500 out of Euston)?
Also said this before I think but surely Manchester to the Airport would be better operated as a self-contained shuttle (and one which probably _would_ justify 6 trains an hour!) with turn up and go connections from elsewhere at Piccadilly? The airport shuttle seems to be the 'standard' pattern across Europe for airports, why not do it in Manchester?
Southampton to London off peak seems to manage OK on a half hourly service, with problems only occurring when 5-coach trains run in lieu of 10. If we don't need 6 trains an hour why Manchester to Leeds?
Last edited:
Reducing the number of first class seats as you advocate would release maybe 4 - 6 standard class seats per train? Hardly "for the many". There are far, far more seats than that required.
Or Manchester to Edinburgh...
Talk about First World Problems
Normally with a timetable change there are winners and losers. However, if this upcoming change gives a much more stable/reliable and achievable timetable then we shall all be winners for once.
Ironically, I recently saw a documentary on a developing world country (one of the 'stans') which showed a modern eight or nine carriage electric train running between two of its major cities. If only we had that between our first world cities of Leeds and Manchester !
Us students (16-25 railcard holders) get the same advance 1st as any other railcard holder and usually it's not low enough to entice me out of standard, especially when we do get a much lower standard class fare (£4.65 York-Newcastle at a day's notice to get me home today for example)
16-18 get cheaper first class but it's rare I see anyone my age in that compartment. Usually season tickets and older leisure travellers.
I used to commute to Cottingley, and campaigned to have one of the two morning calls from Leeds reinstated when they were withdrawn.
So are you also going to slag off those on Senior/Disabled/Two Together railcards who often also use First Class on those "cheap as chips 1st advances?" Because I see a lot of those too.
Not entirely sure what your experience of TPE 1st is, but it's nearly always 50-75% occupied on my route throughout the core of the day (full in peaks, including the 6 car services) with generally more full fare passengers than those on advances and seasons.
This post is spot on really.
Last edited:
Maybe only 4-6 seats but would improve amount of standing area and mean people would use more doors. I avoid even trying Coach A as I know I will end up pressed against the 1st class glass door or leaning across a suitcase.
The same is true of XC. There was once upon a time a move from length to frequency. Now we are at full frequency, and need to revisit train lengths.
If reliability is terrible, then cutting a frequency or two each hour, and elongating trains, could be an option. And paths at certain extremities of the routes, or at certain junctions, might be usable still, for other things.
Everything running Manchester - Huddersfield - Leeds should be 6-8 cars minimum. Same with XC through Birmingham on the core X hourly routes.
Kite159
Veteran Member
I do apologise, for some reason I was thinking the 50% advance deal for students included 1st class advances, but it is standard class only.
But the 1st class area on a 185 is too large for the 3 coach trains, it's nearly as bad as the 1st class area on the refurbished 159s which take up half of the coach.
TheVicLine
Member
TPE control make that decision.
Greybeard33
Established Member
Early days, but the PPM statistics for Monday 10th December, the first weekday of the new timetable, look encouraging. For TPE North, 83.6% on time and only 0.4% cancelled or very late. See http://trains.im/ppmhistorical/TP/97. I think this is probably the best weekday performance since the May timetable change. The average for November was only 62.1% on time, 16.3% cancelled/v late.
The extended turnround times and split stopper would appear to be having the desired effect.
In contrast, Northern's performance remained poor on the 10th. Overall only 78.3% on time, 3.3% cancelled/v late, although again better than the November average of 67.5%/4.6%.
The extended turnround times and split stopper would appear to be having the desired effect.
In contrast, Northern's performance remained poor on the 10th. Overall only 78.3% on time, 3.3% cancelled/v late, although again better than the November average of 67.5%/4.6%.
- Status